Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 4.djvu/473

1741.] at anybody's door. On the 4th of December he opened the new parliament, and, conscious of his own contemptible figure after the submission to French dictation in Hanover, he took care to remind it that he had commenced the war only at the urgent desire and advice of both houses, and that he had been particularly counselled to direct our naval efforts towards America. He next adverted to the menacing confederacy of France, Russia, and Bavaria against the queen of Hungary, and he severely criticised the continental powers who had guaranteed the Pragmatic Sanction, and had all, except England, abandoned their engagement. All that he could hold out in the shape of hope was, that he trusted that a sense of the common danger must, ere long arouse some of the powers to unite against the formidable confederacy mentioned.

The opposition made no objection to the re-election of Onslow as speaker of the commons, but they made a determined attack on the address. Lord Noel Somerset moved that in the address his majesty should be desired not to engage this kingdom in a war for the defence of his Hanoverian dominions. This was seconded by Shippen, who declared that he had grown old in the house of commons, only to see all the predictions of his life realised in the management of the nation. He re-asserted that Hanoverian maxims were inconsistent with the welfare and happiness of this kingdom, and at war with the spirit of caution which inspired those patriots who framed the act of settlement, which conferred the throne on the present royal family. He pointed out the instances in which the minister had violated these cautionary securities, and insisted on steps being taken to prevent the nation being sacrificed to the preservation of foreign dominions. Gibbon, who followed him, exclaimed against the folly of returning thanks for a war of disaster and dishonour. "What!" he said, "are our thanks to be solemnly returned for defeats, disgrace, and losses? — for the ruin of our merchants, the imprisonment of our sailors, idle shows of armaments, and useless expenses?"

Pulteney seemed to be animated by a double portion of patriotic indignation. He reviewed Walpole's whole administration, and accused him, not merely of individual acts of erroneous policy, but of deliberate treachery. The whigs, elated by this fiery denunciation of the minister, called for a division; but Pulteney, aware that they had not yet a majority, observed that dividing was not the way to multiply. Walpole, on his part, offered to leave out the paragraph thanking his majesty for his royal care in prosecuting the war with Spain; but this was only regarded as a proof of conscious weakness, and Pulteney proceeded to charge Walpole with purposely ruining the nation to serve the pretender.

This called Walpole up, and he defended himself with all his accustomed self-command and ability. He retorted the charges of serving the pretender on his enemies, and these with real grounds. He referred to Chesterfield's recent visit to the pretender's court at Avignon. He asked, as he had done before more than once, whether he, as minister, had raised the war in Germany, or advised the war with Spain? — whether he was amenable for the deaths of the late emperor and the king of Prussia, which opened up all these complications? — whether the lawless ambition of Frederick, or the war betwixt Sweden and Russia, were chargeable on him? He offered to meet the opposition on the question of the state of the nation, if they would name a day. This challenge was accepted, and the 21st of January next was fixed upon. The clause respecting the Spanish war, as Walpole had suggested, was also struck out, and the address then was carried unanimously.

But though the 21st of January was to be the day of the grand attack on the ministry, the battle was not deferred till then. Every day was a field-day, and the sinking minister was dogged step by step, his influence weakened by repeated divisions, and his strength worn out by the display of the inevitable approach of the catastrophe. The first decided defeat that he suffered was in the election of the chairman of committees. The ministerial candidate, Giles Earle, was thrown out by a majority of two hundred and forty-two to two hundred and thirty-eight, and the opposition candidate. Dr. Leo, was hailed by a shout that rent the house. "You have no idea," writes Horace Walpole, the minister's son, "of this huzza, unless you can conceive how people must triumph after defeats of twenty years together." This was the point of the wedge — the whole wedge must soon follow. The swarms of petitions against election returns gave opportunity of pursuing the attack without intermission. In these combats Walpole's majority sank to seven; and this induced those who now saw that the old sun was setting, to look out for the rising luminary. Then came a petition against the conduct of the high bailiff and the magistrates in the election for Westminster. The high bailiff had been guilty of some illegal practices at the poll, and three justices of the peace, on pretence of preventing a riot, sent for a military force to overawe the election. The petitioners employed William Murray, afterwards earl of Mansfield, as their counsel; and he made so masterly a charge against the magistrates, that the election was declared void by a majority of four. The high bailiff was taken into custody; the officer who ordered the soldiers to march, and the three justices, were called to the bar of the house, and reprimanded on their knees.

The fall of Walpole was now certain, and he would have consulted both his dignity and comfort in resigning at once. This was the earnest advice of his friends, but he had been too long accustomed to power to yield willingly. He was oppressed with a sense of his defeats, and the insolence of enemies whom he had so long calmly looked down upon without fear. He was growing old and wanted repose, but he still clung convulsively to his authority, though he had ceased to enjoy it. At this time his son describes his condition thus: — "My father, who used to be called in the morning, and was asleep as soon as his head touched the pillow — for I have frequently known him snore ere they had drawn his curtains — now never sleeps above an hour without waking; and he who at dinner always forgot he was minister, and was more gay and thoughtless than all his company, now sits without speaking, and with his eyes fixed for an hour together."

Under these circumstances opened the year 1742. Fearing the consequences of the debate on the state of the nation to take place on the 21st of January, Walpole made a last grand effort to divide the party in array against him: this